After a weekend in peace and serenity I'm back for some more interesting discussion here. Thanks for additional comments guys.
As far as the myth of dark character for Gryphon Tabu. I would say that is not correct if I correlate this with your description of dark and what I heard through Gryphon. I would say that Gryphon Tabu had and exceptional well amount of air, very well defined edges and body of the instruments, very dynamic and seductive sound which is with high energy but not aggressive at all. I would hard to say if that is NEUTRAL but sure I would say it was NATURAL to me and enjoyable as music was all around me. Experience that I had with a relatively very cheap system at that time was memorable and was not repeatable in experience and pleasure of enjoyment of the music. Other components that I used on that time while testing Gryphon Tabu were the following: Canton Venton 807DC, Marantz CD53 (old entry level CDP), Nordost Red Dawn ICs and Nordost Super Flatline Gold MKII.
Soon after that experience I bought second hand MF A308 Dual Mono integrated but I did not achieved the same pleasure as with Gryphon. Also changed CDP for MF Nuvista. In 2010 I also upgraded speakers for Anthony Gallo ref 3.5, where there were a lot of improvement and different presentation of music but still I carry that reference magic moments when the music just emerged and that was I think the blame to Gryphon Tabu. Control and body of the singers and organic body of the instruments struck me the most.
About Gryphon reservation towards USA market something is mentioned on 6moons review and I sense some bad experience Gryphon company had in the second half of 90s. More to read is here: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/gryphon/1.html
What is interesting to point here is that we can identify also NAD's attachment to Gryphon and very interesting background. Is here the answer to the development of NAD S300? I think it goes well together if we look the years when NAD S300 was released (1998).
But if I return back to the topic I have a question that is also rather fairly often said for McIntosh gear. "McIntosh sound" often said but not so often discussed what that can be? What kind of sound is that? How do you compare it towards Gryphon? I guess from your answer now is that it is not so deeply involving and does not reveal all the details that e.g. Jeff Rowland Contiuum 500 does?! I'm just guessing this from your answers. I think that McIntosh is not only about the look as I still see a lot of very happy users who found its sound very lush McIntosh. Does McIntosh offer too much forgiveness?
Thanks for great discussion,
best, del.
As far as the myth of dark character for Gryphon Tabu. I would say that is not correct if I correlate this with your description of dark and what I heard through Gryphon. I would say that Gryphon Tabu had and exceptional well amount of air, very well defined edges and body of the instruments, very dynamic and seductive sound which is with high energy but not aggressive at all. I would hard to say if that is NEUTRAL but sure I would say it was NATURAL to me and enjoyable as music was all around me. Experience that I had with a relatively very cheap system at that time was memorable and was not repeatable in experience and pleasure of enjoyment of the music. Other components that I used on that time while testing Gryphon Tabu were the following: Canton Venton 807DC, Marantz CD53 (old entry level CDP), Nordost Red Dawn ICs and Nordost Super Flatline Gold MKII.
Soon after that experience I bought second hand MF A308 Dual Mono integrated but I did not achieved the same pleasure as with Gryphon. Also changed CDP for MF Nuvista. In 2010 I also upgraded speakers for Anthony Gallo ref 3.5, where there were a lot of improvement and different presentation of music but still I carry that reference magic moments when the music just emerged and that was I think the blame to Gryphon Tabu. Control and body of the singers and organic body of the instruments struck me the most.
About Gryphon reservation towards USA market something is mentioned on 6moons review and I sense some bad experience Gryphon company had in the second half of 90s. More to read is here: http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/gryphon/1.html
What is interesting to point here is that we can identify also NAD's attachment to Gryphon and very interesting background. Is here the answer to the development of NAD S300? I think it goes well together if we look the years when NAD S300 was released (1998).
But if I return back to the topic I have a question that is also rather fairly often said for McIntosh gear. "McIntosh sound" often said but not so often discussed what that can be? What kind of sound is that? How do you compare it towards Gryphon? I guess from your answer now is that it is not so deeply involving and does not reveal all the details that e.g. Jeff Rowland Contiuum 500 does?! I'm just guessing this from your answers. I think that McIntosh is not only about the look as I still see a lot of very happy users who found its sound very lush McIntosh. Does McIntosh offer too much forgiveness?
Thanks for great discussion,
best, del.